Rare, Honest- Refreshing

I was bowled over by a CNN article, on it's own news story.

It's very rare that I'm going to be interested in that kind of story. News that talks about itself? That's usually self-absorption on the order of an American Idol contestant, and thus, not at all interesting. But since it may signal that finally, FINALLY, on the day after the holiday to celebrate the memory of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., finally CNN and other mainstream media may begin to be getting the greatest essence of King's great speech:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

You see, CNN and all the other major media tend to denote Barack Obama as the 'black candidate', and Hilary Clinton as the 'female candidate', at least implicitly. A recent CNN article promoted this 'vision' as the main way for black female voters to look at the Democratic primary in South Carolina, with race and gender the only factor; issues a non-factor, John Edwards a non-factor... nevermind for Dennis Kucinich. Choose: a female president, or a black president.

For these women, a unique, and most unexpected dilemma, presents itself: Should they vote their race, or should they vote their gender?

In the context of Dr. King's words, or any other intelligent context, it's appalling. But, it's refreshing that CNN viewers and website readers rebelled. It's just as refreshing that CNN had the courage to create an article out of the acknowledgment of their stupidity. That's the sort of accountability in media I would like to see more regularly, so kudos to CNN.

The email response is just marvelous. Here's just one message:

An e-mailer named Tiffany responded sarcastically: "Duh, I'm a black woman and here I am at the voting booth. Duh, since I'm illiterate I'll pull down the lever for someone. Hm... Well, he black so I may vote for him... oh wait she a woman I may vote for her... What Ise gon' do? Oh lordy!"

Tiffany urged CNN to "pull this racist crap off" the Web site and to stop calling Hillary the "top female candidate."

"Stop calling Barack the "Black" candidate," she wrote.

The entire articles are worth reading. And if you didn't yesterday, read the entire text of Dr. King's great speech. Then remember: 'content of character', and think about the policy they would promote.

Old Poll Results

I had a long running poll: Who would you vote against. Here are the final results:

Who would you vote against?

Selection ........Votes
Hillary Clinton 53% 121
John McCain 7% 16
Mitt Romney 9% 21
Ron Paul 4% 9
Dennis Kucinich 3% 6
All of 'em - I'll vote Libertarian 25% 57

230 votes total

Clinton and McCain have long been on top of my 'vote against' list. I'm happier to have a possible 'vote for' candidate, in Ron Paul. I remain highly doubtful Paul can win the Republican nomination, so after that event, I will probably be searching for a new 'vote for' candidate.

Presidential Quiz

(Crystal Lake, IL) The Washington Post has an interesting quiz online right now, and it's worth taking if you're into this sort of thing.

You have to choose either the Democratic or Republican ticket. From there, you are faced with a number of issues and the positions of the candidates. You pick the statement that best matches your position, and then you rate it on a scale from being not important to you to very important. In this way, it weighs the outcome and steers you towards someone you are most likely to be interested in. The best feature is that you do not know who the statement is coming from when you cast your vote.

I took both D & R because I wanted to see if I would find any surprises. I did!

No surprise that I found myself most aligned with Ron Paul. No surprise also that I found almost no affinity for Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, John Edwards, or Hillary Clinton. I was surprised at having some affinity for Fred Thompson and Bill Richardson, and almost none for Barack Obama. Here are my scores, combining Ds & Rs in this tally:

Paul - 58 pts

Richardson- 27

Thompson - 20

Chris Dodd - 13

Mitt Romney - 9

McCain - 7

Obama - 5

Clinton - 4

Edwards - 4

Huckabee - 4

Giuliani -0 pts

There were some issues where I liked nobody's answer, so I picked the least intolerable, and called it 'not important' so as to give it as little weight as possible. It probably explains many of the points earned from Romney on down.

Among R's, Paul got points with me on Iraq, trade, taxes, and scope of government. Thompson got some on immigration and also scope of government. I figured Paul would get virtually all of my points, but alas. I'm going to have to look over Paul's positions on immigration!

As for the D's, there were several questions I just didn't want to cast a vote at all, but had to in order to get through the thing. For instance, there was a question on the ban on federal funding from stem-cell research. All of the Dems were in favor of repeal of the ban and getting funding going, shading it in their own ways. I'm opposed to any federal funding, but not in favor of banning research. I just don't believe scientific research should be the role of the federal government. I don't think there is any D or R candidate that I agree completely with on this issue, though.

Anyhow, Richardson got my points for Iraq and same-sex marriage issues, but also some tax issues. Dodd also got my points for tax issues. It was funny- I was guessing that Richardson was Dennis Kucinich for the Iraq items. I was surprised to see Kucinich left off the quiz, while Ron Paul was included. I take it as a sign that Paul is increasingly found viable by the MSM.

I got a stronger feel for the Democrats than I had before. So long as they are talking civil liberties and Iraq, I 'm kind of in there with them. As soon as they get to domestic fiscal policy, I want to run screaming. They are big on pointing out the fiscal disaster of the Bush Administration- which I agree with- but then they have huge programs they want to empower, all while claiming the mantle of fiscal responsibility. Sorry, raising taxes to the sky to cover the cost of these programs is nothing at all like fiscal responsibility. It may not leave a deficit, but neither will it leave an economy standing.

I'll give both Thompson and Richardson a look. I wouldn't have considered either of them worthy of even a look until taking this quiz. I'm still ardently backing Ron Paul until one of two things happens: a Libertarian candidate arises that makes me forget about Ron Paul; or, Paul fails to win the Republican nomination. He's not perfect by me, but he's the best of the bunch.